Posts by Henry

    Reclassify him? Why, he's always the same of before.

    In case of positive demo? Positive demo result is already sure before! :D As ever in the past, see old presentations, 1MW Plant shows, Hot-Cat, TPRs...

    Have you read Alans posts in the past? He himself is capable to judge the equipment or to ask the right questions about the equipment used in the demonstration. Experts skilled in thermal and electrical measurement wont add any information to the infos we get from Alan. They could add information if they were allowed to test the E-cat with their own equipment. But that is never going to happen - not in a Rossi demo. I think with Alan as a "watchman on the wall" we have all we could ask for.

    Alan is a great friend of the most Italian supporter of Rossi. I never read by him technical criticisms about the flawed tests of Rossi (on the contrar other fusionists have done), so do not confuse a good and independent engineer (really skilled) with a simple cheering role of who is already convinced.

    I'm going with a real academic heavyweight...

    Again, it needs only people that really understand of thermodynamics, skilled and expert of thermal and electrical measurement able to perform a good MFC, this means good professional engineers, not other professors, academics... moreover people not already convinced like some fusionists,

    Ask to Rossi if he would like these persons and accept to demo in front of them his "miracle-masterpiece"!:D


    hope to use the opportunity to organise an 'impossible physics' university symposium on LENR and EmDrive with demos sometime in 2018

    Still chatters and promises of fusionists, do a demo right now if you really have something in hand (I don't believe).

    The King of Hoax in Miami never allowed any demo run by an independent and reputable party, 100% free by his control and abracadabra.

    He has fear to be caught with his hand in the cookie jar. :D


    Even if the reactions don't produce a single joule of excess energy, the results are extra-ordinary.

    A possible explanation for these extraordinary results?

    The usual miracle invoked by fusionists. :)

    Well, GSVIT put out their Mizuno report 4 days ago. It was scathing, and too personal for my taste, but they seemed to bring up valid points. So what happens now: Does someone give Mizuno a copy so he can defend himself, or just pretend it never happened?

    Obviously it never happened... being that the best Tech-watcher of fusionists has immediately defined here that report as: "Tahakashi Mizuno published astounding results" ;)


    If we can work with this kind of team and instrument, it could be solved in few years

    Solved (working with you :D ) in few years what ?

    AlainCo leave these scientists do their job, they are studying real research fields, not phantomatic or alleged claims of XH and unproven nuclear reactions.

    Oi oi, Mizuno san


    4 - Conclusion

    The document which at first glance may seem exhaustive and well documented (although written in English quite broken) contains many inconsistencies and errors theoretical, computational and experimental. All this suggests that as a result of all these errors (the most sensational flow measurement fan equal to twice the range with free air flow stated by the manufacturer) the author has measured excess heat but is not.

    As the author states at the end of the document that the continuous laboratory survey, suggest to abandon the methodology of measurement of the supposed excess heat used to here and follow the simple rules described in ' Appendix D .

    "Pre-order" farce is an old act already online since 2011-2012...., "Smith" is another puppet of the Boss of Hoax at work.

    Dear BoH, can you invent something new (more funny), baloney like at least... "a robotized pre-order list"? :) :) :)

    No problem, what he repeated many times it's irrational simply because it's a long time bluff.

    That example is for Science (not clownery and trickery by AR), Five-sigma meaning applicable to the BoH (boss of hoax) is:

    Five-sigma corresponds to a probability of 3x10^-7, or about 1 in 3.5 million (normal distribution).

    This is not the probability that the e-Cat exists or doesn't exist; rather it is the probability that the e-Cat is not a hoax and the "masterpiece" (he claimed) could be true, getting the confidence of 99.9997% that e-Cat is a hoax.

    Naive buyers beware, he's still seeking for chickens to be plucked. :D

    I'd expect Rossi wants to find funding for the quarkX but can survive on gains so far without that, and values his status as inventor extraordinaire, with a nuclear physics Journal and scientists all over the world as friends.

    Yes, he's searching the next chicken and a new accomplice somewhere.

    The theory written by Focardi is not at all devoided of any scientific basis! All the theories on LENRs are still hypotheses, otherwise we could read about LENRs in the most famous mainstream scientific journals. But that doesn't mean that these theories are unfounded, and what Focardi has written is perhaps not the right explanation for the functioning of the E-Cat, but it is not without foundation. Maybe Focardi has always tested the E-cat in the presence of Rossi, or maybe not .... how can you know that? Were you his assistant? Anyway, before he met Rossi, Focardi had already achieved several successes with cells built personally by him, so his confidence in the LENRs was not born with the E-Cat. What you say about the possibility that Focardi has been bamboozled by Rossi qualifies you as an ignorant who knows nothing about Focardi or about his research field, and who talks nonsense for the only purpose of insulting Rossi.

    Focardi was not a "theorical" and this is very evident reading what kind of stuff he wrote. The theory written by him is quite ridiculus because Ni+H=Cu nuclear fusion CS in that conditions, as known to any good scientists of nuclear Science (GAS), it's tiny (order of 10^-6 barns) and up to now proofs of that claimed fusion simply do not exist.

    As "experimenter", before to met and to be bambolized by Rossi, he made thermal measures based only on temperature (using high questionable calibration methods and so on) but nevertheless he claimed "excess heat". He never made a decent mass flow calorimetry test measuring the heat as due.

    It had been a great delusion, an old dreamer (emeritus-retired professor) and gullible, used by the hoaxer.

    Focardi has proposed a theory to explain a phenomenon and any theory can be overcome over time. Rossi continued with experiments and studies and probably what he saw over time led him to develop another explanation for the operation of his devices. But Focardi has not only written theoretical articles, has also released many interviews in which he talked about so many experimental tests performed with Rossi and described the positive results. But people like you at this point cling to the usual stupid apology by saying that Focardi was old and hence he was deceived by Rossi. Focardi was a great professor and a great experimental physicist, he was perfectly able to distinguish an object running from a scam and the words that he left us are valid for me more than all the small talks that are written on the internet.

    Focardi simply wrote a "theory" devoid of any scientific basis and he never tested any E-Cat independently from Rossi.

    He was a dreamer that was already convinted about CF, Rossi used him to get some "scientific credit" and in order to cover his hoax.

    What did you smoke? I never talked about fusionists, so you can't know my opinion about them .... but you don't need to know, you already have your truth, isn't it? I've already mentioned to you the evidence: the articles written by experts who tested the E-Cat and wrote that it works ARE EVIDENCE. But you ignore them deliberately.

    What did you drink? A very strong drink it seems :D

    What "your experts" wrote (sorry wrote not on Nature) are not scientific evidences that it works like claimed, it proves only that who tested that stuff committed a lot of "mistakes".

    What problem do you have with Mr.Cook? Do you think he can not formulate a valid theory for the fact that he is affiliated with the Department of Informatics? Do you think that only a Nobel can deal with science? It is difficult to seriously consider your way of judging Rossi and his associates if these are your judgmental parameters. In addition, Cook has formulated a theory. If you think that every time someone presents a theory should also make an experiment that validates it, then you are showing all your ignorance about these themes. And not just on these issues: what peer reviewed magazines would have buried the TPRs? Tell me their names, please, I'm just curious to see what you invent!

    In his "paper" (where published? on Nature ? No?) Cook even ignores how works the nuclear fusion he invoked. He wrote a fusion equation for Li+p is:


    claim the absence of Gamma Rays and Neutrons emission

    This is his dream... in nuclear Science (it's not my invention, LOL) it's s well known and proved that kind of fusion it's a lot more complex, just to summarize:

    and the fusion paths are overlapped, the fusion results depend by the proton energy and value of CS.

    Could Cook be a good "Informatics" ? Maybe... but a Nobel (ROTFL) for his funny "nuclear theory" is absolutely out of discussion, that's paper is ticky-tachy.

    There are scientific evidence, the first dates back to the years of the collaboration with Focardi, then there were the tests of Ferrara, Bologna and Lugano, and the first IH (positive) tests, and there are the Swedish professors who are doing a replication of the E-Cat. How many tests do you need to understand that his technology works?

    Really? and where are the proves of? You believe to fusionists's rumors, not need proofs.

    You have a strange ideas of what is a real scientific evidence and probably you also miss that Focardi paper and theory have been "not confirmed" even by Rossi himself. LOL


    When Rossi will succeed in transforming his invention into a commercial product, you will have nothing to cling to for keep on talking this way.

    Oh, when? "The year of the cat" ?

    :D :D :D

    • Kenneth Kocher September 1, 2017 at 8:33 PM

      Dear Dr Andrea Rossi:

      1- On your quest to achieve Sigma 5 stability, how far along do you think you are: 25,50,75% or more?

      2- Who decides when Sigma 5 has been achieved?


    Is this the Sigma 5 calculation procedure of his Mathematical calcula?


    • pasted-from-clipboard.png